cvs commit: ports UPDATING ports/Mk ports/biology/pymol Makefile pkg-plist ports/cad/pythoncad Makefile pkg-plist ports/databases/gadfly Makefile pkg-plist ports/databases/skytools Makefile pkg-plist ports/databases/zodb3 ...

Wesley Shields wxs at
Tue Jun 9 14:34:55 UTC 2009

On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 09:12:32AM +0200, Rene Ladan wrote:
> 2009/6/9 Martin Wilke <miwi at>:
> > miwi        2009-06-08 22:30:55 UTC
> >
> >  FreeBSD ports repository
> >
> >  Modified files:
> >    .                    UPDATING
> [...]
> >  Log:
> >  - Update lang/python26 and make Python 2.6.2 to the default Python version
> >
> >  Tested by:      3 pointyhat runs
> >  Thanks to:      pav, gahr, lwhsu, mva, amdmi3
> >
> I successfully upgraded python25 to python26 using portmaster -o, but
> got stuck at the upgrade-site-packages step.
> When executing
> # cd /usr/ports/lang/python
> # make PORTUPGRADE_CMD=/usr/local/sbin/portmaster upgrade-site-packages
> it complains that it can't find pkg_which, which seems to be part of
> portupgrade.
> Is pkg_which the same as pkg_info -wq or pkg_info -oq ?

You can use pkg_info -qW but there are other subtleties involved. For
example, the usage of pkg_which can take multiple arguments on the
command line but pkg_info can not. This means you have to use "-L 1"
with xargs which drastically slows things down. I'm working on a patch
which I hope to send out for review soon.

> Is there a real difference between make upgrade-site-packages and just
> updating all installed *py25* packages manually?

Yes, as it's not just py25 packages that need to be updated. For example
there are files in /usr/local/lib/python2.5/site-packages which pkg_info
tells me came from a package that does not start with py25 (in this case
it is pyblosxom).

For now I have spoken with Martin and removed the portmaster
instructions from UPDATING because of the issues you outline in this

-- WXS

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list